Barber Babbles About Hate Speech Laws

Matt Barber got on a Tea Party Unity conference call last week and claimed that America is on the verge of having hate speech laws that will throw Christians in prison. In fact, Obama used his criticism of Donald Sterling as a trial run in his fiendish plot to throw the Christian into FEMA camps.

We’re probably five, six years at the most, I think, behind Canada in terms of enacting such hate-speech kind of laws and crackdown. It’s already happening informally, as we saw, again, with Mozilla, with Eich, as we’re seeing with Donald Sterling.

And it’s easy to do with Donald Sterling. You know, they can test the waters because, I think, universally people agree that what he said his horrible and he’s just kind of a not a very appealing guy and his words were reprehensible. So, they’ve already banned him for life from the NBA, they’ve already banned him from having anything to do with the team that he owns, which may or may not be appropriate, but people are clamoring and saying, ‘That’s not enough!’ And I don’t know what else they want to, do they want him tarred and feathered, do they want him drawn and quartered? They certainly want to force, and confiscate his property, and that’s what we’re talking about, and that’s what happened with Brendan Eich, they confiscated, essentially, his livelihood, his means of carrying out a living and feeding his family.

Gotta love that use of the pronoun “they” to refer to entirely different antecedents. The first “they” would be the government, which is the only entity that can pass hate speech laws. Then suddenly in the second paragraph “they” means private businesses making hiring decisions. Hey Matt, whatever happened to that free market you love so much? And to those “right to work” laws you support that allow companies to fire anyone they want for any reason? When a group boycotts a company and that company takes action in response to the boycott, isn’t that the free market at work? It always seems to be when you call for boycotts, which you do all the time. But when a boycott supports something you don’t like and a company does something you disagree with, it’s suddenly — and magically — “economic terrorism” and a precursor to the mass arrest of Christians. You might want to get your logic meter fixed, it appears to be broken.

President Obama did not mention that, hey, a law was violated in the taping of this, yet they are using that illegally gained fruit of the poisonous tree in order to go after this guy, to excommunicate him from the NBA, and now to try and confiscate his property. This is scary stuff, but it’s indicative of the lawlessness that we’re living under under this Obama administration.

He knows he can get away with the GOP, regrettably, at this point – the go along, get along Republican Party establishment who doesn’t want to be called racist – he can get away with murder. So the only thing that would stop it would be their own cost-benefit analysis determining that the American public would not be ready for such an act.

This is why I believe they’re testing the waters, with Mozilla, with Brendan Eich, President Obama weighed in on that and exacerbated and fanned the flames, with Donald Sterling, President Obama weighed in on that, fanned the flames.

I think they’re testing the waters to see what they can get away with. And if they feel like the political climate is ripe for this kind of Orwellian executive order, I would not be surprised to see him essentially through executive fiat reinstate the Fairness Doctrine over the talk waves and go after hate speech even in the context of private conversations, that as Rick points out, are apparently, have all been recorded and are on record, so they can come after any of us for things that we have said or things that we would say.

Hey Matt…have you ever noticed that none of your dystopic fantasies ever comes true? No one is seizing everyone’s guns, there are still no FEMA camps, not a single pastor has been arrested under the hate crimes law for preaching against homosexuality. Under the Biblical standard for false prophets, you would have been stoned to death by now in ancient Israel.

"Radical human sacrifice? Radical? Radical, really?I'm surprised he didn't call it socialist or liberal too; ..."

Swanson Thinks Burning Man Wants to ..."
"I think Swanson has confused Burning Man with the Wicker Man."

Swanson Thinks Burning Man Wants to ..."
"Men and women of the (whole) cloth have been fleecing the multitudes ever since . ..."

Swanson Thinks Burning Man Wants to ..."
"Yeah, but who can write their name in the snow the best?"

Trump’s Meaningless ‘Shift’ in Afghanistan Policy
Follow Us!
POPULAR AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • eric

    the go along, get along Republican Party

    Irony meter officially broken. And I had it working on a log scale.

  • Kevin Kehres

    Hey, Matt. Sterling’s a Jew. Hard to be discriminating against Christians when the guy isn’t one.

  • colnago80

    President Obama did not mention that, hey, a law was violated in the taping of this, yet they are using that illegally gained fruit of the poisonous tree in order to go after this guy, to excommunicate him from the NBA, and now to try and confiscate his property.

    It is my information that Sterling knew he was being taped so no law was broken. Incidentally, let’s recall the case of Linda Tripp who taped conversations with Monica Lewinsky without the latter’s permission or knowledge. This is illegal in the State of Maryland. Did Barber or anyone else on the fascist right demand that Tripp be indited and tried? I thought not. Quite the contrary, a number of Rethuglican poobahs criticized the Maryland attorney general when he began an investigation, accusing him of trying to intimidate a witness.

  • Childermass

    “Hey Matt…have you ever noticed that none of your dystopic fantasies ever comes true? ”

    Nor that of the right-wingers that came before him. See: Claire Conner’s Wrapped in the Flag.

  • Chiroptera

    …but people are clamoring and saying, ‘That’s not enough!’

    Is this true? Who are saying that more needs to be done to Sterling?

    …and that’s what happened with Brendan Eich, they confiscated, essentially, his livelihood, his means of carrying out a living and feeding his family.

    How is this true? Is being a CEO the only marketable skill Eich has? If so, I think the fault lies in the poor decisions he made in choosing a college major.

    …I would not be surprised to see him essentially through executive fiat reinstate the Fairness Doctrine over the talk waves and go after hate speech even in the context of private conversations….

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but the Fairness Doctrine was about allowing a variety of different view points access to broadcast media, not punishing “hate speech.”

  • RickR

    It’s telling that these creeps always frame any kind of pushback against their most vile opinions and/ or behavior as an attack on christianity.

    This is the picture American christianity is painting of itself, and it’s not pretty. No wonder young people are staying away in droves, and even the already faithful are leaving the flock.

  • Synfandel

    We’re probably five, six years at the most, I think, behind Canada in terms of enacting such hate-speech kind of laws and crackdown. It’s already happening informally, as we saw, again, with Mozilla, with Eich, as we’re seeing with Donald Sterling.

    Cool your heels, Matt Barber. Neither what Brendan Eich did nor what Donald Sterling said would constitute legally actionable hate speech in Canada. The bar is pretty high.

  • Pierce R. Butler

    How do you test water by fanning flames, or vice-versa?

  • cptdoom

    I would not be surprised to see him essentially through executive fiat reinstate the Fairness Doctrine over the talk waves and go after hate speech even in the context of private conversations, that as Rick points out, are apparently, have all been recorded and are on record, so they can come after any of us for things that we have said or things that we would say.

    Oh, Matt, if we had the legal ability to go after hate speech – which I wouldn’t want us to have, actually – we wouldn’t have to go after your private conversations. Your public utterances and writings are more than sufficient to confirm you really, really hate the gays.

    Oh, and for the government to come after you for “things that [you] would say,” then the movie Minority Report would have to have been a documentary.

  • busterggi

    “We’re probably five, six years at the most, I think, behind Canada in terms of enacting such hate-speech kind of laws and crackdown.”

    Wait a minute – all the Christians in Canada were rounded up & put into concentration camps???? When did this happen?

  • http://adventuresinzymology.blogspot.com JJ831

    now to try and confiscate his property

    Dude needs to learn how a franchise works, I guess. My mother ran a franchise salon (multiple at one point). When the land lord of the last one she had refused to renew her lease, she looked to move the salon elsewhere. The franchise board said no. You stay where you are, or you close (there were no places near by that didn’t fall in another salons footprint).

    So, she said, “Heck, I’ll just move and no longer be a franchise, I’ve been at this for over 20 years.” Only not that easy, the franchise technically owned her customer lists as well as all the employment contracts with the stylists. She’d have to start from scratch. So, she closed up shop, and didn’t get a penny for the hard work over the decades.

  • dugglebogey

    What law was broken in the taping? The guy was taping himself because he felt like he was getting “forgetful.”

    It’s against the law to tape yourself now?

  • Nihilismus

    . . . a law was violated in the taping of this, yet they are using that illegally gained fruit of the poisonous tree in order to go after this guy, to excommunicate him from the NBA, and now to try and confiscate his property

    I would bet that Barber is the kind of person who would normally argue against the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine in other cases, like when a minority is being charged with possession of drugs found after an illegal search. Also, there are no criminal charges here — the NBA on its own has taken action. You might be able to sue a private employer for an invasion of privacy, but it won’t get you your job back.

  • colnago80

    Re #10

    Gee, when did Stephen Harper get sent to a concentration camp?

  • http://florilegia.wordpress.com Ibis3, Let’s burn some bridges

    “not a single pastor has been arrested under the hate crimes law for preaching against homosexuality”

    Even in Canada.

  • whheydt

    The shifting “they” makes one suspect that Barber thinks that the NBA is a government agency, and perhaps he thinks the Mozilla Foundation is one as well.

  • jefferylanam

    Re #10 ” Is being a CEO the only marketable skill Eich has? ”

    No, he actually created the JavaScript language in only a few days. I have a lot of quibbles about the design, but it’s an impressive feat. If he had stayed in the technical side of the industry, no one would have cared much about his personal beliefs. It’s when he became the face of Mozilla that they became a big deal.

  • Kevin Kehres

    Of course, the Fairness Doctrine would not have banned hate speech. It would, however, have guaranteed equal time to those opposing hate speech.

    Someone doesn’t know what the Fairness Doctrine was about. It also only applied to broadcast outlets; cable-only services were excluded. The reason being that the airwaves were considered a public utility, which the government licensed for broadcasters to use.

    In this day and age, it’s an anachronism. Like a “radio host” railing about gay marriage.

  • dan4

    @12: Uh, it’s pretty common knowledge at this point that Mrs. Stiviano tapped the conversation between her and Sterling without the latter’s knowledge or consent. That’s where the possible lawbreaking comes in.

  • Ichthyic

    Is this true? Who are saying that more needs to be done to Sterling?

    IIRC, the NBA is looking at forcing him to sell the team.

    I do believe Barber already knew this though, and is deliberately trying to set up the reader to think how outrageous that is, when it really isn’t.

    see comment number 11 for why franchises are not the same as private ownership.

    the NBA is perfectly within its charter to force any specific owner out of the NBA if that owner is not following the rules of the franchise.

    it’s a rather large business, and it doesn’t take kindly to black eyes being given to it by anyone, even any individual owner.

  • freehand

    dugglebogey: It’s against the law to tape yourself now?

    .

    Only without permission.

  • StevoR : Free West Papua, free Tibet, let the Chagossians return!

    Under the Biblical standard for false prophets, you would have been stoned to death by now in ancient Israel.

    It was supposed to be Biblical Law I gather but, I wonder, anyone recall reading of any cases where that actually happened? Where any “prophet” of ancient Israel was ever found to be false and actually got that penalty?

  • busterggi

    Well there were Cheech of Samaria and Chong of Ephesus…